Webber: Did he need to stop three times?

If I quote people from 2008, I can also make it look like "accorinding to load of former drivers and team principals" Lewis and Felipe are the best out there, and Fernando not so much. However, that would just make me look silly, like I'm purposely ignoring more recent information because I would otherwise not have a case.

In 2008 Alonso was winning in a Renault that shouldn't have been any where near the front of the grid. I don't think you would have found many people saying he was worse than Hamilton or Massa. Massa was still a joke of a driver at the time, it just so happened that the Ferrari was so spectacularly quick that he was within a few seconds of the WDC.

Getting mired behind Grojean was the beginning of the end - but put it this way; Vettel was able to do an alternative strategy. Sadly, I don't think Webber is as versatile. With tougher tyres Webber is as fast as anyone, but it take more than that in 2013.

For sure not. Red Bull got the result they wanted. Seb first Webber second.

 

There are plenty of people sensible enough to see that. Mark was managing his tyres perfectly fine. 

If they were on the same strats, Vettel would have passed Webber, just like Alonso inevitably passes Massa.

The three stopper was Webber's best chance at winning the race, and if he had dispatched Grosjean as quickly as Vettel did, he might have.

In 2008 Alonso was winning in a Renault that shouldn't have been any where near the front of the grid. I don't think you would have found many people saying he was worse than Hamilton or Massa. Massa was still a joke of a driver at the time, it just so happened that the Ferrari was so spectacularly quick that he was within a few seconds of the WDC.

Won. As in Singapore 2008. Where the team put him on an odd early pit strategy so his team mate could crash and he could win the race. And Alonso the clown still thinks that was a valid win. And Massa is a joke?

I don't think any of Massa's wins were obtained in such dubious circumstances.

And to keep this on topic, the problem with the 3 stop was that Webber couldn't pass Grosjean quickly. Vettel did and won. That's it.

Edited by OldSoldier2, 13 October 2013 - 14:30.

That is true, you can't be sure, but you can't hide the fact with goinf for a three stopper they knew they would give the best card into Seb's hand. Mark's race eng. said: You are racing Grosjean". Nothing more needs to be said.

Yeah, that's what normally happens when one driver is in the hunt for the WDC, and the other isn't.

What's the problem?

In 2008 Alonso was winning in a Renault that shouldn't have been any where near the front of the grid. I don't think you would have found many people saying he was worse than Hamilton or Massa. Massa was still a joke of a driver at the time, it just so happened that the Ferrari was so spectacularly quick that he was within a few seconds of the WDC.

Well, the 11 team bosses collectively certainly thought Alonso was no better than Kubica, and quite a bit behind Lewis and Felipe.

2008
1. Lewis Hamilton (88 points)
2. Felipe Massa (86 points)
3= Fernando Alonso (50 points)
3= Robert Kubica (50 points)

 

Alonso was even lower down the rankings in 2009.

To be fair there though, it is judged on the 2008 season

It is very difficult to get ranked if you are in a mid-field car like Alonso was in 2008-2009 and hard to win that poll if you are not WDC (Alonso achieved that last year), it was only halfway through 2010, that drivers and teams outright said based on all round performance that Alonso was the best driver.

Now, if that vote happened again right now based on overall performance and not just based on 1 season, Seb might just win and beat Alonso, but it go the other way. In 2008 if the vote was who is the best all round driver and not just the best in that season, Alonso might have won that also.

To be fair there though, it is judged on the 2008 season.

Which is exactly my point.

People here are using old quotes to proof Vettel right now is not considered as good.

The face of a man who knows he has been wronged

We'll never know but agree that this was the result RBR wanted. 

If they were on the same strats, Vettel would have passed Webber, just like Alonso inevitably passes Massa.

 

The three stopper was Webber's best chance at winning the race, and if he had dispatched Grosjean as quickly as Vettel did, he might have.

Seb seemed to be making no impression, if anything he was falling back.

Which is exactly my point.

People here are using old quotes to proof Vettel right now is not considered as good.

Fair enough.

Well I can only disagree with them myself, I am not sure who is "the best" but I think it comes down to either Lewis, Alonso or Seb. I would say me thinking Lewis (which I do, and I am more than a bit bias) would be in the minority in 2013. I would say most think Alonso or Seb are the top drivers, despite the latter having more critics.

Can we please keep to the topic

Webber: Did he need to stop three times?

Can we please keep to the topic

Webber: Did he need to stop three times?

Sorry, my fault 

Seb seemed to be making no impression, if anything he was falling back.

It is hard to know if that was an actual lack of pace (unless he falls back really far) or driving to some delta time requested by the team. After all, the drivers were instructed to keep a gap of 2-3 seconds to maximize tyre life. That makes sense especially when preparing for a longer stint than the competition.

Seb seemed to be making no impression, if anything he was falling back.

Seb was told to stay at 2 - 3 seconds, which he did.

When he was told to attack, he did, swift and convincingly.

There is no basis for your claim.

Seb seemed to be making no impression, if anything he was falling back.

He was keeping his car in clean air.  We all know that.

What do you think the odds of a MW win would be at a betting shop if you put MW in front of SV on the same strat with 53 laps to go?  Conservatively I would think 5/1, probably higher, Vettel is a signficantly better driver at this point in their careers, just like Alonso is compared to Massa.

Maybe they'll let Mark win in Brazil, once Seb has wrapped up the title... That'd be a nice payback to let Mark take Interlagos in his final race.

Mark seemed happy enough with the decision. I think he was just questioning if it was the right one as he didn't make it work but I didn't get the impression he feels he was wronged.. and he has no reason to stay silent if he does think that.

Horner says Webbo stopped too early to make a 2 stopper viable and webbo's questioning a 3 stopper by lap 11 asking why he's stopped.

Classic team management, I think Horner is a graduate of the Ron Dennis school of management - Webbo has been stage-managed since day one and he's just figuring it out with 4 races left in his career.

Edited by JimiKart, 13 October 2013 - 15:49.

Another bit of info : when he tried to attack RG at the end of the race Mark once pushed the DRS button too early and so had no DRS.

The question for RB was simple : "What will more likely happen if Webber's undercut at the second stop fails (with a 2 stop for everyone)?" The answer was simple and so was the decision to split the strategy. The team achieved what it wanted : a 1-2 instead of a very possible 2-3.

Edited by Diablobb81, 13 October 2013 - 15:54.

Horner says Webbo stopped too early to make a 2 stopper viable and webbo's questioning a 3 stopper by lap 11 asking why he's stopped.

 

Classic team management, I think Horner is a graduate of the Ron Dennis school of management - Webbo has been stage-managed since day one and he's just figuring it out with 4 races left in his career.

It's how I feel about it as all. Shame for him that he hasn't figured it sooner... I hope he enjoys racing with Porsche more than with this lot.

Because they are winning so why change?

If you are winning, you won't add 0.1 s to the car?

No, he did not. 

Once again they gifted the GP to Sebastian. 

Years ago, when stuff like this happened, the giftee would give major props and publicly acknowledge that the gifter deserved the victory. Vettel is suck a little prick he just doesn't even care and even goes out of his way to make Mark look like the jerk. 

Mark seemed happy enough with the decision. I think he was just questioning if it was the right one as he didn't make it work but I didn't get the impression he feels he was wronged.. and he has no reason to stay silent if he does think that.

"Seemed happy" is such a generic observation.

To me Mark looks like a guy who just wants closure and is mentally already working on his next project.

He's just going through the motions right now. 

Did he really say that, sitting in his crumbling glasshouse? 

My post of the day.

No, he did not.

Once again they gifted the GP to Sebastian.

Years ago, when stuff like this happened, the giftee would give major props and publicly acknowledge that the gifter deserved the victory. Vettel is suck a little prick he just doesn't even care and even goes out of his way to make Mark look like the jerk.

Nothing was gifted, Vettel gave a master class in tire management and overtaking. The only people making Webber look like a jerk are the people who believe he would keep resigning with a team that sabotages him every race.

All I read are complaint about a strategy, nothing about Vettel's KERS or Vettel's horrible start. These things only matter if they happen to webber

No KERS issues today for Vettel and they both got a bad start.

No.

RBR played webber very nicely. He still had pace on those tyres when they decided to switch to a 3 stopper, as shown by him getting close to romain on his lap to pit. There was no reason to switch to a 3 stopper unless they wanted clear air for vettel and get rid of webber for the victory.

As if after passing romain, webber would get near vettel and pass him in a couple of laps just because he had softer tyres. Tyres that would be completely shot by that time due to him pushing every lap to get near vettel...

I would love to know what would have happened had they kept him on 2 stops and behind Grosjean, switching Vettel on a 3 stopper with him doing a Singaporean performance passing them both in a remote speed fight. We would see the same people saying Webber was screwed by RB favouring Vettel. 

Here is what looks weird.

1 - RB told vettel over radio very shortly after webber 2nd pitstop he is no longer racing webber, I immediatly knew what this meant but the sky commentators got confused by it.

2 - Webber showed no signs of trye wear prior to his 2nd pitstop, looked clearly too early.

3 - Webber with 11 laps to go was circa 16 secs ahead, slower than vettel but less than 1 sec a lap slower.  I was watching live timing at this point and thinking just stay out, and only pit if the tryes hit the cliff.

Edited by chrcol, 13 October 2013 - 17:07.

Horner says Webbo stopped too early to make a 2 stopper viable and webbo's questioning a 3 stopper by lap 11 asking why he's stopped.

 

Classic team management, I think Horner is a graduate of the Ron Dennis school of management - Webbo has been stage-managed since day one and he's just figuring it out with 4 races left in his career.

Wow, you must think he's the stupidest man alive then, or do you think you're the cleverest?

Once again they gifted the GP to Sebastian. 

 

Years ago, when stuff like this happened, the giftee would give major props and publicly acknowledge that the gifter deserved the victory. Vettel is suck a little prick he just doesn't even care and even goes out of his way to make Mark look like the jerk. 

How anyone can describe that GP as gifted is beyond me. 

Looking at thread in summary, there were quite a few posters in this thread pointing out that other strategies would not have resulted in a win by Webber as well. It is also not clear that a 3-stop strategy was inferior at all. I haven't seen any argument backed up by lap times etc. showing how Webber could/should have won.

Seriously, with roles reversed, we would have lots of "can't overtake" posts for Vettel and people celebrating how Webber made that difficult strategy work and praise for his great tyre management.

"Seemed happy" is such a generic observation.

 

To me Mark looks like a guy who just wants closure and is mentally already working on his next project.

 

He's just going through the motions right now. 

Whilst you're just producing them.

I think both strategies would've been equally effective, to be honest. He had track position if he stayed out, but watching how quickly Vettel dispatched Grosjean, there's no guarantee he wouldn't have done the same to Webber.

Also, it's Webber's own fault his strategy didn't work out. Vettel got past Grosjean on hards, yet Webber couldn't make the move on fresh mediums when Grosjean's tyres were even older at that point. Considering the fact that Webber, from about eight seconds behind on mediums, was also slicing about 1.5 seconds per lap out of Vettel's lead with eight laps to go, it's not hard to believe Webber was actually on the ideal strategy.

Webber had an opportunity to win today's race with the strategy he was on--anything to suggest he didn't and was deliberately hindered to help Vettel win is just conspiracy theorist dribble.

Sig-worthy... yup unless you have concrete proof including video evidence you better not suggest anything that even remotely shines a negative light on Seb or "it's dribble", a laughable position to take.

Webbo is just like DC, every year they sat down to renew and thought, this is my year, they got every assurance things would be equal, but they were manipulated and in the end both got burned and both took forever to figure it out. 

Wow, you must think he's the stupidest man alive then, or do you think you're the cleverest?

There you go again arguing history, please do everyone a favor and read about what has happened in the past, even Bernie has admitted to having ultimate control over what drivers can and cannot do over the course of a season and in a particular race... it's not even up for discussion, it's happened many times.

Are you saying DC is stupid because he was manipulated and it took him forever to figure it out

Here is what looks weird.

 

1 - RB told vettel over radio very shortly after webber 2nd pitstop he is no longer racing webber, I immediatly knew what this meant but the sky commentators got confused by it.

2 - Webber showed no signs of trye wear prior to his 2nd pitstop, looked clearly too early.

3 - Webber with 11 laps to go was circa 16 secs ahead, slower than vettel but less than 1 sec a lap slower.  I was watching live timing at this point and thinking just stay out, and only pit if the tryes hit the cliff.

1. What is weird about that? He is no longer racing Webber, because he is on a different strategy.

2. Horner said there was significant tyre wear in Webbers first stint. You need to pit early to make an undercut work.

3. It may have been an option, but the pit decision is not that surprising since those tyres hit the cliff at some point and 28 laps on one tyre is quite a risk, especially with the setup Webber had. Even Vettel got slower in the last 2 laps of his 23 lap stint. Btw. the gap was 14.5 seconds with 12 laps to go and Vettel on 12 laps fresher tyres.

Edited by apoka, 13 October 2013 - 17:27.

There you go again arguing history, please do everyone a favor and read about what has happened in the past, even Bernie has admitted to having ultimate control over what drivers can and cannot do over the course of a season and in a particular race... it's not even up for discussion, it's happened many times.

 

Are you saying DC is stupid because he was manipulated and it took him forever to figure it out

There I go again? The last time we 'debated' you attemped to re-write your own posting history and I demonstrated that you were a clueless troll and liar, so I can understand why you're not a fan of the past.

Getting back to the present, are you now claiming that all races and drivers are stage managed WWF style? If so, why is the puppett master turning cash-cow fans off and away in droves by arranging for the bad guy to win all the time?

 

There I go again? The last time we 'debated' you attemped to re-write your own posting history and I demonstrated that you were a clueless troll and liar, so I can understand why you're not a fan of the past.

 

Getting back to the present, are you now claiming that all races and drivers are stage managed WWF style? If so, why is the puppett master turning cash-cow fans off and away in droves by arranging for the bad guy to win all the time?

Now there's no need to start calling names, I suppose you're upset so I'll forgive you but you really do need to look into this F1 thing in depth.

It seems your two options are limited to extremes at either end of the scale but you've missed everything in between, you'll learn that many drivers have been held in check so as to produce the desired result, second in the WDC to their team mate along with the team winning the WCC, so there's nothing extreme about suggesting that it's happened to Webbo at RB and no reason the mere suggestion that Seb had a little help from the team should send you on a name calling tirade.

Edit - world wildlife fund?

Edited by JimiKart, 13 October 2013 - 17:56.

Because they are winning so why change?

Winning now doesn't mean you're winning next year. Or the year after that. You'll always go for the best drivers available should the car not be the best one day. Why do you need the most obvious things explained to you?

It's how I feel about it as all. Shame for him that he hasn't figured it sooner...

I don't know how incredibly ******** you think Webber is that he can't figure out in 6 years something a couple of ill-informed armchair experts on a forum can, but I think it is an incredibly disrespectful attitude towards Mark.

Horner likes to preach about treating the two drivers equally. There is no need for team orders when the title race is all over by the shouting -

And where were you after Malaysia, when team orders were employed in race 2 with nothing on the line at all?  

any kind of podium finish would have been a great result for Vettel‘s WDC. If you are going out of your way to treat your two driver‘s equally you don‘t split the strategies.
The only rationale I can see for splitting the strategies is because of Grosjean. If they ran the same strategy, it would be easy for Lotus to cover. You can‘t cover two cars on different strategies. In the end you can‘t knock it, it worked. Lotus covered Webber‘s early first stop while Vettel was able to go longer on the option without losing much time, and this meant that when Lotus tried to cover Vettel on the second stint, they were fighting a losing battle against a car with newer tyres and they got overtaken.

 

You can't take for granted that Vettel would save his tyres and be able to do a 2 stop - this could not have been part of a "plan" by RBR.  That strategy didn't develop until Vettel had saved his tyres and was able to stay out longer.  There was no plan to "split strategies" until they had to be split.  At first both were trying for a 2 stopper, thus, both were told, on GLOBAL television for all of our ears to hear to back off to 2 seconds behind the car in front to save their tyres.  When Mark's tyres saw him start rapidly losing pace to Vettel and Grosjean, he was brought in (L 12), and thus he was placed on a 3 stop strategy.  Vettel didn't eat his tyres and remained on a 2 stop strategy.  Still, Mark could have done better if he had passed Grosjean right away after is last stop - he could have challenged over the remaining 6 laps on his new tyres in clear air for 1st.  But instead, he couldn't get around Grosjean quick enough.  Meanwhile, to make things tougher, Vettel did get around Grosjean quickly and took off in clean air and put the distance on.

Edited by bourbon, 13 October 2013 - 18:00.

There you go again arguing history, please do everyone a favor and read about what has happened in the past, even Bernie has admitted to having ultimate control over what drivers can and cannot do over the course of a season and in a particular race... it's not even up for discussion, it's happened many times.

 

Are you saying DC is stupid because he was manipulated and it took him forever to figure it out

 yeah bernie used his remote control to stop webber overtaking grossjean, the wrong man has been booed, it isn't vettel, its bernie!!! BOOOOOO

Ok sorry, I see the problem it's my mistake, you guys are young enough that you think I'm talking about Bernie in his modern day role, conspiracy by remote control and all, ha ha I can see how you could think I was nuts... sorry I didn't realize you didn't know that he used to run a team before he was F1 supremo, check it out I'm sure it's on google.

edit - sorry but to stay on topic todays 3 stop fits perfectly into the strategy of finishing Webbo 2nd and not infringing on everything Seb wants.

Edited by JimiKart, 13 October 2013 - 18:11.

I think he was put on that stratagy to help seb out tbh

Now there's no need to start calling names, I suppose you're upset so I'll forgive you but you really do need to look into this F1 thing in depth.

 

It seems your two options are limited to extremes at either end of the scale but you've missed everything in between, you'll learn that many drivers have been held in check so as to produce the desired result, second in the WDC to their team mate along with the team winning the WCC, so there's nothing extreme about suggesting that it's happened to Webbo at RB and no reason the mere suggestion that Seb had a little help from the team should send you on a name calling tirade.

Tirade? Hardly; I was just recollecting your lamentable recent record when discussing RB. We all know teams will use one driver to support another if the WDC requires it, but that's very different from your implication that Webber has been totally hamstrung, beguiled, befuddled and generally taken the piss out of for four years - even more so when you claim it's at Bernie's order. Quite apart from anything else I simply don't believe Webber's that feckless. Red Bull are fully aware of the reality that Webber is their second best driver, and act appropriately when neccaessary, but that's no different to any other team.  

Maybe they'll let Mark win in Brazil, once Seb has wrapped up the title... That'd be a nice payback to let Mark take Interlagos in his final race.

Sorry but Red Bull is a sports team and not a charity team.

He did if Red Bull wanted Vettel to win...

Sorry but Red Bull is a sports team and not a charity team.

I thought it was a drink?

so are we to believe that horner gave webber the 3 stopper as webbers best chance of winning the race - despite the fact this could only work if webber could catch and pass vettel within a few laps of the finish - and that he horner wouldallow that given vettel cold possibly close out the wdc.

really??

and at what stage did redbull and horner put webber on a 3 stopper? given itseems vetelwas always on the 2 stopper. why wasnt webber kept on te 2 stopper - if it was the fatstest strategy he had the best chance of geting past grosjean given he was only just behind him - relatively easy to see the chance of under cutting at some point in the race ...

isnt the truth that this was merely a more subtlefor of manipulation a la austria. yes webber could have got grosjean better and earlier but then he was always going to have to come up against vettel with the likelehood that with these crap tyres that they and his chances were gone??